What do people think of those horrendous shots in the railway yard - clearly the car and the figures are models. Also, shortly after, when the car is chasing Erica's car over the railway tracks the car is obviously a model. Hitchcock gave us some similarly unconvincing shots in The Lady Vanishes. Otherwise, a hugely enjoyable film - one of Hitchcock's best and most underrated.
I agree--Hitchcock even used tiny human figurines that moved. Watch the railmen at the start of The Lady Vanishes. Nothing wrong with it. The modern CGI can be pretty tacky-looking.
If you think these were bad, try Hitchcock's Number Seventeen, which has an extended chase sequence composed largely of phony-looking models. The Lady Vanishes opens with one of these model shots, making it look as if we're about to watch a black-and-white "Mr. Roger's Neighborhood."
I imagine 1930s audiences accepted such things, just as we accept, say, the deer in I Am Legend that look as if they've just escaped from a video game.
I only like CGI when I don't know it's there. Otherwise, generally, I'd prefer to see real, physical things, even if they don't look realistic. I Am Legend (a pretty good movie, incidentally) made me feel as if I should have a joystick in my hand.
Part of the charm of this film (and of my all-time favorite by any director, The Lady Vanishes) is the way in which you are wisked off into a charmed world--something that today's literal-minded films, done to suit our literal-minded sensibilities, may struggle to do. For me, the fact that old movies were shot on tiny sound stages only makes it easier to suspend disbelief. Consider that a great novel that takes you into an alternate universe is only a pile of pages in your lap.
I agree with ryepsen. The model trains and buildings are all part of the magic in cinema. How many movies have I seen that featured a pie plate from outer space coming here to invade the world?
A film should tell a story rather than convincing an audience that the deer is real.
…and that’s why I love the old series of Star Trek… they told stories withot depending too much on special effects.
The first model shot of the railway yard at night I thought was a good way of getting a the night tracking shot. It makes you wonder how difficult a tracking shot was to do back in those days, and question when day for night shooting was discovered.
I also wondered how you balance the equation of model building versus on location stunt shooting for the cars being stopped at the railroad crossing.
If you are caught up in the story you tend not to see FX. The models were good, but the night lighting had some issues. Adding model people always shatters the illusion though.
I just watched Independence day, and still was aware of the model animation, however in Trainspotting I never knew it was a prosthetic arm they injected into until I saw the behind the scenes feature.
Was that nightime tracking shot of the railway sidings really a model? Just saw it in a restored version on the big screen, and it looked very convincing... from the trains passing down to the apparently seamless zoom in on the protagonists in the car...
The very obvious model shots were the opening ones on the cliff - and the endless-perspective road, which was played for laughs. (I don't believe there can be such a straight road anywhere in rural England!)